Graphical Manipulation - Beheaded and Sold? 40
popdookey asks: "Can a known image of me be beheaded and marketed as someone else without my permission? I just returned home to Georgia and discovered that my head had been replaced on a favorite photograph that was now being used to promote sandwiches. It was a great photo of a few of the old-time employees and founders of a very successful restaurant franchise taken in front of its original location. The faces of the employees have been replaced with those of the wealthy but absent owners to create a more marketable and nostalgic image. It is great advertising, but 92.3% of that body is mine as was 100% of its contribution. Is this legal without my permission, and if so, wouldn't this lead to historical fraud?"
Correct me if I am wrong, but... (Score:2, Informative)
For the most part, whoever took the picture, owns it.
Those paparazzi guys make a killing selling photos to the Enquirer and other tabloids.
simple (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Correct me if I am wrong, but... (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, you have to have a model release in order to use someone's likeness for commercial purposes. However, they have to be identifiable. Since the guy's head is removed, he's not identifiable, so there's no legal violation.
Examples: I can take a photo of you and publish it on my personal website. I cannot take a photo of you and publish it on my business website (korphoto.com [korphoto.com] if you're interested
You should talk to a lawyer (Score:5, Informative)
Key questions you need to answer:
1) Did you sign a written consent form allowing the company to use your photograph?
2) Do you have the original photograph to use as evidence that you are in fact the one in the picture?
3) Do you have current contact information for the other employees in the photograph that have been similarly misused?
4) Do you know when the ads first appeared, how long they have been running, and in what medium (newspaper, TV, magazines, web, etc.)?
5) Do you have samples of the advertisment in question that could be used as evidence?
6) What jurisdiction applies? If the ad was shown in California you may have more protections for use of your photograph; Georgia only appears to have such restrictions for serious crimes like child pornography.
Your action does not concern "fraud", per se. Fraud, legally, is decieving others for gain. What you need to focus on is the state statues that require an employee to provide written consent before that employee's photograph can be used for marketing purposes.
For more details, see a general discussion on the issue from FindLaw [findlaw.com]:
For instance, see California Civil Code Section 3344-3346 [findlaw.com]. I'll quote a small portion of this section which directly applies to your situation:
The company is likely to argue that, because your head is not visible, you cannot be readily identified under 3344(b)(2):
The company may also insist that your likeness is not "essential" to the advertisement, per 3344(c):
Re:Possible precedent (Score:3, Informative)
I'm guessing you have never hired a professional photographer?
I figure 3 days for the trip to Poland, 100+ shots of large-format film stock, add in airfare plus shipping costs for lighting and cameras, living expenses for photographer and assistant(s), disruption to plant while you pick out 50 employees and get them to pose, plus buy-out on the rights for the image(s) that you high-res scan and digitally comp together to get a final pic where everyone is smiling and no-one is blinking, and you'll be lucky to have change from $30,000.